I'm filled with an urge to play matchmaker and pair him up with Ann Coulter. Assuming they could be sterilized to rule out any possibility of reproduction.
Natter 62: The 62nd Natter
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
But what if they actually liked each other? The world might never recover.
Not to be catty but isn't she OLD for that? But of course, she's got money... No wonder I know Prager as a fairly frequent(Bach) Worst. Person. In. The World!(/Bach)
It could be worse. He could be a regular worstpersonintheworld (hold the Bach).
That shopping center that the Obamas were at (in the article tommyrot linked) was my growing-up shopping center. Koko Marina, just down the street from my house from 6th grade on.
Surreal.
t eta just read the rest of the article - aww! They went to Sea Life Park! I went there often as a kid.
What strikes me about that article is how completely he's defining sex as something a woman gives and a man takes. Not an act, but a commodity. He repeated uses phrasing like "gives her body to him," but never once mentions that the woman is supposed to get anything out of it, other than what the man will give her in exchange.
Also, the "of course men are animals" thing. I love how often "men are animals who are controlled by their sexual urges unless women civilize them" and "women are controlled by emotion, while men are logical and rational" seem to come from the same people.
Plus the illogic of his argument -- if wives don't have sex with their husbands often enough, then the husbands will have sex with other women. What other women? In his argument, women don't get anything out of sex except for the benefits of marriage, so what woman, in his world, would be willing to sleep with any man other than her husband? Taking his argument only about half a step beyond where he takes it, the only women possible in the world are wives, wannabe wives, and prostitutes.
Plus the illogic of his argument -- if wives don't have sex with their husbands often enough, then the husbands will have sex with other women. What other women? In his argument, women don't get anything out of sex except for the benefits of marriage, so what woman, in his world, would be willing to sleep with any man other than her husband?
He's arguing in favor of marital rape. Why would you assume these hypothetical "other women" have any greater say in the matter than the hypothetical wives?
He's arguing in favor of marital rape. Why would you assume these hypothetical "other women" have any greater say in the matter than the hypothetical wives?
OK, true. He also says that every man goes through a "heroic" effort every day to not cheat on his wife, again raising the question of, "Really? Every single day you have an opportunity for extramarital sex and you turn it down?"
lisah, did you know if you email our vet, they'll call you back? How awesome is that? (I emailed about the torn claw.)
Serious Eats makes it official - Bacon is the Ingredient of the Year.